DrakeWoodsfellow DrakeWoodsfellow

Lame Game

▼

Lame Game

from GalCiv2 Forums
At first glance the game is more than great, its amazing. Which is part of the problem. I only buy games that have had good reviews. This one had great reviews, but I think the people that rated it spent a limited time playing it. As you play the game more, you notice little things, that I can deal with. As you play more, you see many more pitfalls. Big pitfalls, that I can't deal with. Like the dread lords that randomly appear on a map. You can't kill them, they appeared only a few weeks into a few of my maps. I had to drop everything I was doing and research planetary invasion as quick as I could before they built one shipe, cause at that point in the game, one of their ships will kill everything you own. Everything. Then come the pirates. They are almost worse than the dreadlords. They are more powerful than any of the races you play against. They will kill everything you own also. Ok, now lets add the jagged knives. They take over random planets. This is fine, but they take them over without having to invade. They just boot any ships you had in orbit off the planet and take it over completely. Yet again LAME! I don't mind a challenging game. I like games that take a long time to master. But to throw in things that just can't be beat, or at best, just to jerk you around, is a waste of my time, and I don't like to spend 8 hrs on a map, just to have my entire day wasted because pirates decided to kill everything I had made in 2 rounds of gameplay, just as I was about to win. I also had a problem with advertising. It says that you can make custom ships, and then you can save them and the computer will use them. This sounds great. But, they only use ships that look like the ships you made. I made a custom race, I wanted it to research laser technology. I played against the computer, and all of the ships I designed were now equipped with missiles. So the computer is just doing what it wants, not what I want it to do. Yet again a let down. I realize that no game can be perfect, and I can deal with that. I can't put up with a game that has huge problems such as this game. If I could get my money back I would, its a waste of money, but those are the chances you take when you buy games.
15,663 views 46 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Warhammer is a strategy game, not an RPG, table top strategy game with lots of miniatures moving around the table. And there are more than three types of weapons. A lot more than 3. But as I said, I was just using it as an example, because I saw that two people had made mods about warhammer, so it was fresh in my memory when I posted this. I'm not unhappy because the computer is playing with intelligence. I just want my CUSTOM races to be like I want them to be. Like I said in my previous post. As an example... The Tau army uses plasma weapons. So if I made a Tau army on this game, I would like them to use Plasma weapons. The Eldar are fast, so I would like them to focus on engines for speed. Space Marines focus on armor, etc. JUST AS AN EXAMPLE.
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Be able to set what tech paths the AI would prefer? Actually, that's a pretty good idea. Perhaps you should suggest it to the Devs in a thread with a less troll-y title?
WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Drake, we are unable to grasp how you can say that a game is lame solely based on an event (or two) that you can actually turn off. An actually constructive critism would be, "I think, even though mega events are designed to unbalance the game, the pirates event is a bit too unbalancing, especially compared to the other mega events. I think the devs should take a look into this", instead of something like "omg pirates screwed my game THIS GAME IS LAME LAME LAME".

And until the pirates event changes, you can simply turn it off and enjoy the game (if you actually want to enjoy the game that is)
Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Be able to set what tech paths the AI would prefer? Actually, that's a pretty good idea. Perhaps you should suggest it to the Devs in a thread with a less troll-y title?


The original poster has to ask him self what his goals are. One; bring up an issue with the game that he feels is too unbalanced and needs tweaking or two; vent his frustration over an issue that he thinks is a game wrecker by complaining and offering no potential solutions. For example it bother’s me that on beginner level the AI focuses on improving planet tiles before building up useable tiles or the first thing the AI build is a spaceport. I could write one of the following posts,

One
I can’t believe I spent money on this piece of junk! The AI is so stupid my cat could beat this game. I can’t believe Stardock had the nerve to release this game. I mean I only buy games that have good reviews and this game blows. The AI can’t adequately defend itself against me. And I am not an expert player. Geez what a waste of a game.

Two
Playing on beginner level, the AI’s build priorities seem out of wack. The AI concentrates on starports and everything else before building factories need to build other improvements. Does this do this on harder levels?

Three
I am playing on beginner level and the AI tries to improve tiles before building factories that will allow tiles to be improved in say 30 to 50 turns instead of 100. The dev’s might want to look at this. Unless of course it is a WAD for beginner level. If it is could someone please let me know. Thank you.

If the original poster is a little dismayed at some of the harsh responses just keep in mind that the one draw back with communicating via a message board is that other people can’t read your body language or hear your tone of voice. In your mind you might legitimately be trying to help but your message did not come across that way. Just a suggestion.
Reply #30 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It doesn't seem that I have been the only person that has the same problems with the game. There are other posts that say the same things. I posted this not just to reach the players, but in hopes that one of the guys that made the game would just hear my angry constructive criticism and maybe change things in a future patch or game project.


I agree, the people here (myself included) have a habit of jumping on issues rather quickly, however you must also understand where we are coming from Drake.

In regards to the "same problems" that you mention, it seems that a large amount of those are dealing with the Mega Events. Complaints are given that they are unfair, game killing, unbalancing, etc.

When the idea for them first came out, the Devs asked us (the players) if we would want these events to be there to totally unbalance the game. The vast majority said yes, but out of consideration for those who might not like them, we asked that they be optional. The Devs listened. The discussion can be found here: WWW Link

So, after many of us discussed, debated and accepted the idea, to have people come in and start complaining about it is somewhat annoying, especially when lesser random events happen regardless of if it is turned on or off. Further, since this is a feature that most of us were in favor of because of it's unbalancing effect, we don't want to see them nerfed becuase new players don't yet understand the game and it's history.

We asked for it, we got it, and we don't want to give it up. If all the devs read are people complaining about it, then they might change it. So, we want to make sure that what we asked for remains intact. So, we have been somewhat brutal in our responses to those who are knocking it. Imagine you got a nice cute puppy for Christmas, then someone came up and started kicking it, you would be upset as well.

I hope that this doesn't sour you completly to the game. Understand that when we were promised this, many of us had been playing for eight months or more, and were ready for soemthing new. I hope that as you get more game time in that you will either grow to appreciate them, or simply play without them.
Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Weapons in GalCiv2 are not all created "equal". Each branch has its strengths and weaknesses, and are advantageous to pursue at different times and in different situations.

What you desire is possible but would require modding the game, using custom races and pruning tech trees, specifically weaponry/defenses. From what I understand you could also add custom effects, even create entirely new weapon types. The Babylon5 mod is one example.

Then the designers (apparently, somewhere) say that it's INTENDED to be that way, and you should just turn off the features you paid for. And then, to top it all off, people attack you as "venomous and irrational" for being annoyed by that.


I do think Kopema has something of a point here. Personally I would like to see more "feature-richness" added, than tweaks that simply rachet up the difficulty.

I leave Mega Events on and try to grind my way through no matter what, I don't like surrendering to the dev's





Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
for good puntucation,


And you lost a few points, eh?
Reply #33 from Stardock Forums Top
Personally I would like to see more "feature-richness" added, than tweaks that simply rachet up the difficulty.

I leave Mega Events on and try to grind my way through no matter what, I don't like surrendering to the dev's

I guess some people are saying that the developers originally tried to balance the Mega Events, but then a majority of some group of people "voted" for deliberately unbalanced events. I'm registered in my state, and I didn't get a notice about this one, so I think it's safe to assume they only polled the people who were still playing every day, and who were still manning the forum a year after the game was released. But what percentage could that be compared to the total number who bought the game and liked it, but then went back to their lives until the sequel came out?

I'm not saying that endless tedium is necessarily a bad thing, but there's only going to be a limited (and perhaps even insular and self-limiting) group of people who are into that. It's altogether too easy for developers to fall into the trap of sitting back and listening to only their most rabid fans. Unfortunately that leads to ignoring that larger, but far more easily overlooked, market segment: people who AREN'T compulsive psychotics.
Reply #34 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I guess some people are saying that the developers originally tried to balance the Mega Events, but then a majority of some group of people "voted" for deliberately unbalanced events.


Not really, the developers were the ones who originally came up with the idea for the Mega Events to be unbalanceing. Those on the forums just voiced our approval, and gave suggestions for possible events.

I'm not saying that endless tedium is necessarily a bad thing, but there's only going to be a limited (and perhaps even insular and self-limiting) group of people who are into that. It's altogether too easy for developers to fall into the trap of sitting back and listening to only their most rabid fans. Unfortunately that leads to ignoring that larger, but far more easily overlooked, market segment: people who AREN'T compulsive psychotics.


Hey, those voices keep me company. On a serious note, you do have a point. However, do you have a better solution to feedback? Who is the better person to ask about for game advice, those that are currently involved in the game, or those who once were? Ideally, I would say a mix of both. Those who still play to determine what kept them playing and what they would like; as well as those who are less commited to the game, to find out what would draw them back (and move them into group 1).

Unfortunitly, that isn't always the most efficient meathod (both in time and money aspects); so the devs relied upon the commited fan base for feedback, many of whom were more then willing to offer suggestions, and later beta test the results. Were I in the devs posistion, I can't say taht I would have done things any differantly (but seeing as I have no buisness experiance, that doesn't mean much).
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I guess some people are saying that the developers originally tried to balance the Mega Events, but then a majority of some group of people "voted" for deliberately unbalanced events.


You're misunderstanding. Mega events were originally conceived by the devs as massive, unbalancing things. They asked if people liked the idea, and got a largely positive response. Some folks were concerned that these massive unbalancing events might screw up the game for less experienced players or those who prefer a more balanced experience, which is why it was decided to make the optional. At no time were they supposed to be balanced, that would eliminate the whole point of them. "Non-psychotic" players have a check box to turn them off precisely because the devs don't exclusively listen to hardcore players. If you dislike them, I suggest you avail yourself of that checkbox.

In future patches I'm guessing that box will be unchecked by default, I think most of the complaining about mega events would go away if it were.
Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Also, just because you turn off mega events doesn't mean that you turn off random events. Your games will still have random precursor ships that can be discovered, boosted or dropping tax rates, population growth changes, planets becoming asteroid fields, new habitable planets appearing, and many more!

Turning off mega events only turns off the random events that are designed to challenge experienced players still looking for something more after they can breeze through any difficulty level. Are you on of these players looking for an even harder challenge? Does watching all your ships getting wiped out put an evil grin on your face as you devise a new way to conquer the galaxy? Be honest with yourself, and if you are not one of those players, turn mega events off.
Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There's something called "willing suspension of disbelief." Yes, we're aware that the underlying game rules are abstractions. There has to be - no computer has the processing power to simulate an entire galaxy with complete accuracy. Most people don't care, and are able to suspend said disbelief to enjoy it as a space strategy game rather than just an abstract one.
I'd like to respond to this one (Reply #11). My problem is that the game mechanics often aren't a simplification of believable mechanics, they're made up from nothing but the creativity of someone who thought the current economy-sliders would be 'fun' (as an example).
Instead they're disruptive. I hate them. I can't manage the taxes of my empire without thinking: "This dude has no clue!" I'm not allocating spending, I'm wipping around sliders in the made up system of some dude who thought that Tetris is too realistic and complicated. (Exaggeration intended.)

I like it when things behave naturally. Then I don't have to spend a long time thinking about how stuff works and I don't have to visit forums to read up on it. The first time I played GalCiv2 I assumed the spending-sliders worked like they say they would. I spend 100% of my money and then I want my treasury to not increase at all. I thought that the treasury-gain despite 100% spending was a bug until I read the forums.
So by "fudging" with the gameplay with the goal to make it easier the game became confusing.
That's basically the message I'm trying to put through.
Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I thought that the treasury-gain despite 100% spending was a bug until I read the forums.
So by "fudging" with the gameplay with the goal to make it easier the game became confusing.
That's basically the message I'm trying to put through.


Yeah, can you imagine what the players who don't check this forum are going through with regards to figuring out this game! Thank God I took the time to come here when I first started playing/having issues, otherwise I imagine the CD would have become an overpriced coaster.
Reply #39 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
thats just your opinion DrakeWoods, but I think GC2 is a great game.
Reply #40 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Lets use Warhammer 40k as an example, because some of you know about it. The Tau, use plasma weapons, so I want my Tau to use plasma weapons. Eldar are known for being fast and agile, so I want my Eldar to have engines over armor. Things like that as an example.


Just to clarify, the Tau also use Missiles (Crisis suits & Broadsides) & Railguns (broadsides again & Hammerhead gunships).
Most Tau capital ships are outfitted with ion cannons, railguns & really, really big railguns! WWW Link

Eldar ships speed is completely dependant on the direction the ship is travelling in respect to the systems sun due to them being powered by the solar winds. Long range fleets are relocated using massive webway gates/tunnels.
Eldar ships do not really have armour as such, but are reliant on "holofields" for protection.
Best way to kill an eldar ship is to distract it's captain with stupid amounts of fire power & wait for the ship to plow into something more solid than it is!
Reply #41 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'd like to respond to this one (Reply #11). My problem is that the game mechanics often aren't a simplification of believable mechanics, they're made up from nothing but the creativity of someone who thought the current economy-sliders would be 'fun' (as an example).
Instead they're disruptive. I hate them. I can't manage the taxes of my empire without thinking: "This dude has no clue!" I'm not allocating spending, I'm wipping around sliders in the made up system of some dude who thought that Tetris is too realistic and complicated. (Exaggeration intended.)

I like it when things behave naturally. Then I don't have to spend a long time thinking about how stuff works and I don't have to visit forums to read up on it. The first time I played GalCiv2 I assumed the spending-sliders worked like they say they would. I spend 100% of my money and then I want my treasury to not increase at all. I thought that the treasury-gain despite 100% spending was a bug until I read the forums.
So by "fudging" with the gameplay with the goal to make it easier the game became confusing.
That's basically the message I'm trying to put through.


They are models of natural systems, just not the natural systems that are described in the manual. I will give you one by saying that the manual is horribly inaccurate when describing the game.

The spending slider, for example, does not model the percentage of income being spent, it models the percentage of your infrastructure being financed. This actually allows for more flexability than the first model would, since it allows you to spend money at a deficit.

I'm really not sure what the problem is here. If it's that you think the exact mechanics of the game are somewhat murky and ambiguous, I'll give you the point. They really could have done a better job on the game manual. However, if you're saying that the game's models inherently don't make sense, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you. Beyond that, there's really nothing I can say.
Reply #42 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
This is the most idiotic post I've seen on this board.

Solution to all your bitching: Remove the check next to "Mega Events" in the game setup... Problem fixed.
Reply #44 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Mega Events are SUPPOSED to unbalance the game. Why don't people get this...
Reply #45 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Read a post in a different thread about Mega Events. The player (poster) was facing hard times. Suddenly an event sprang that killed most of the advesaries peoples (plauge). A Mega Event can actually help you.

If you want a stable, orderly galaxy, just uncheck it. And its not that this option is the only thing in this expansion. It has so much more in it that you/we should be more that happy with Mega Events or not.

0ver and 0ut!
  
Reply #46 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Interesting thread . . . as a long time on (and mostly off) player (going back to the original OS/2 version), I was not prepared for Mega Events. That said, a quick check of the forums set me straight. That said, I shouldn't have to check the forums to figure this out. Maybe the size of the Mega Events could be set via a slider in a future version?